Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm a supporter of partial privatisation. I'm a libertarian so while I think there should be some sort of bankrolled socialised health organisation to act as a safety net, I think we should copy the Germans; the vast majority of the population should be receiving their healthcare from the private sector mainly through health insurance.

    My idea was to subsidise university hospitals, giving free and anonymous access to anyone who needs it* while injecting state aid into our universities and increasing R&D expenditure. (I expect all funding related to healthcare to be channeled through this organisation). However it can even be an organisation similar to NHS.

    Spending more on healthcare is not a negative thing. Germany or France have reputations for producing far better healthcare despite having more liberal funding of healthcare.

    *literally anyone from tourists to illegal immigrants to vulnerable citizens who are unable to use private healthcare. Access is open to even citizens with private healthcare plans or a high amount of savings.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    In our country if you are unwell we look after you. There's no need to wrangle with an insurer. We take care of the sick.

    That's a noble sentiment and the NHS was the national reward for war effort and reflection of the one-nation sense of really all being in it together in the postwar years. Undoing it in favour of competition and lean management and mixed-mode provision and capped indemnity and the rest of the buzzword bull**** would be a terrible betrayal of that inheritance.

    Makes me proud to be British (and there's dwindlingly little else that does).
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cambio wechsel)
    In our country if you are unwell we look after you. There's no need to wrangle with an insurer. We take care of the sick.

    That's a noble sentiment and the NHS was the national reward for war effort and reflection of the one-nation sense of really all being in it together in the postwar years. Undoing it in favour of competition and lean management and mixed-mode provision and capped indemnity and the rest of the buzzword bull**** would be a terrible betrayal of that inheritance.

    Makes me proud to be British (and there's dwindlingly little else that does).
    It could be so much better! Just because Britain is superior to USA and several third world countries doesn't make it good! How is it that most countries (France, Germany, Japan) with partially privatised healthcare score better on health rankings?

    This remind be of education in Britain. Surely we should encourage private schooling in Britain, and nurture independent schools that are affordable to our middle classes.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    The NHS stands up well to the french and germans grass not always greener etc
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Because the NHS provides equal healthcare for all citizens.

    If we were to fall into privatization then the quality of health care we would receive would depend on our own personal earnings and what kind of insurance we can afford. We would be treating human beings like a car.
    Even visits to the GP are incredibly expensive but this would be covered by any kind of insurance, however, what if somebody had a brain tumour? What if a child had a brain tumour? The quality of their treatment, operations, therapy, rehabilitation etc would depend on what the individual could afford in terms of insurance and overall it would cost something in the range of tens maybe hundreds of thousands of pounds. What if your insurance doesn't cover this cost? Will you pay off your own back? Does a family have to put themselves into life long debt to save the life of their child?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Cant paste link but there was a june 2014 study reported in the indi
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by earthworm)
    The NHS stands up well to the french and germans grass not always greener etc
    And vice versa.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rkjtallon1994)
    Because the NHS provides equal healthcare for all citizens.

    If we were to fall into privatization then the quality of health care we would receive would depend on our own personal earnings and what kind of insurance we can afford. We would be treating human beings like a car.
    Even visits to the GP are incredibly expensive but this would be covered by any kind of insurance, however, what if somebody had a brain tumour? What if a child had a brain tumour? The quality of their treatment, operations, therapy, rehabilitation etc would depend on what the individual could afford in terms of insurance and overall it would cost something in the range of tens maybe hundreds of thousands of pounds. What if your insurance doesn't cover this cost? Will you pay off your own back? Does a family have to put themselves into life long debt to save the life of their child?
    It doesn't work like that. Have a look at what happens in Europe. They have an NHS equivalent healthcare service funded through a mix of mainly state contributions and topped up with private healthcare insurance. The standard of service is coma problem for noatter where you are on the income scale.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I agree, in theory the NHS is brilliant, but in reality it's a failure. It puzzles me how people get angry about paying anything for healthcare, when they're just paying for it anyway via their taxes.

    I've have seen 4 incidents now in my family where several NHS hospitals have messed up. My family have tried to take them to court, but note forgery, fake staff testimonies and not forget the legal system's 'support the NHS' bias has stopped us. I've lived in other countries (including Mexico) and the NHS has to be the most corrupt and shoddy I've seen. Sure the skilled doctors and technology is there, but they are also being wasted.

    Overall, I'd rather see some privatization, a business-like sense for getting quality rather than low cost. Ironically, too much effort is based on cutting costs at the moment than actually providing quality, life-long treatment.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    It doesn't work like that. Have a look at what happens in Europe. They have an NHS equivalent healthcare service funded through a mix of mainly state contributions and topped up with private healthcare insurance. The standard of service is coma problem for noatter where you are on the income scale.
    Ok so if my understanding is correct then basically the NHS continues to be funded by its current means aswell as insurance companies?

    And as alot of the NHS is funded by national insurance payments does that mean I will havr to continue to pay my NI? And THEN take out an insurance scheme?
    Doesn't really make sense.
    Of course National insurance isnt inclusive of the NHS. Or will it come from various taxes such as income tax? So i'll be paying for a system from my own wages that I have to take out an insurance scheme for?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rkjtallon1994)
    Because the NHS provides equal healthcare for all citizens.

    If we were to fall into privatization then the quality of health care we would receive would depend on our own personal earnings and what kind of insurance we can afford. We would be treating human beings like a car.
    Even visits to the GP are incredibly expensive but this would be covered by any kind of insurance, however, what if somebody had a brain tumour? What if a child had a brain tumour? The quality of their treatment, operations, therapy, rehabilitation etc would depend on what the individual could afford in terms of insurance and overall it would cost something in the range of tens maybe hundreds of thousands of pounds. What if your insurance doesn't cover this cost? Will you pay off your own back? Does a family have to put themselves into life long debt to save the life of their child?
    I want to point out a few flaws in your argument:

    > Liberal European countries opt for this system. I'm not lobbying for the US system, or even the system proposed by their Democrat Party.

    >We already have a wealth divided healthcare system, many people have private insurance and use private healthcare.

    > Libertarian healthcare is not necessarily wealthist. The system I am lobbying is from Germany, which has universal health care and has special price caps on essential health insurance.

    > Since I advocate a 'saftey net', poorer families can choose not to receive some treatments on insurance and use the socialised organisation instead. In more socialist France, many people take out private health insurance to cover health costs.


    I'm supporting a hybrid of healthcare systems mainly found throughout Continental Europe and all these countries offer universal healthcare.

    I think some of you are even overlooking minor factors such as doctor's pay in Britain, or even that our healthcare is already very privatised and money driven (money per patient etc...).

    I also do not mind healthcare being partially subsidised through tax subsidies (healthcare is deducted from tax payments up to a limit, and negative taxes can be possible). However I haven't properly thought negative taxes through, and some of the positives of libertarian healthcare might be lost.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rkjtallon1994)
    Ok so if my understanding is correct then basically the NHS continues to be funded by its current means aswell as insurance companies?

    And as alot of the NHS is funded by national insurance payments does that mean I will havr to continue to pay my NI? And THEN take out an insurance scheme?
    Doesn't really make sense.
    Of course National insurance isnt inclusive of the NHS. Or will it come from various taxes such as income tax? So i'll be paying for a system from my own wages that I have to take out an insurance scheme for?
    The European model is that you pay a NI which covers the bulk of the cost and then you top it up with private medical insurance.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Europe

    So in Germany for example 77.5% of the cost is met by the taxpayer, the rest is covered by your medical insurance.

    In order to stop the 'but what about those who can't afford it' unemployed, long term sick, pregnant etc are covered automatically.

    What e have in the UK is a healthcare system that is 100% provided by the state. It's ever increasing and we therefore have three options.

    1) follow the European model.
    2) throw ever increasing amounts of money at it.
    3) outsource certain deliverables to make the money spent go farther.

    A grown up debate is needed on the NHS as a lot of the 'save our nhs' brigade I can't help feel should be renamed 'help me secured job' brigade.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theroyalwhigs)
    I want to point out a few flaws in your argument:

    > Liberal European countries opt for this system. I'm not lobbying for the US system, or even the system proposed by their Democrat Party.

    >We already have a wealth divided healthcare system, many people have private insurance and use private healthcare.

    > Libertarian healthcare is not necessarily wealthist. The system I am lobbying is from Germany, which has universal health care and has special price caps on essential health insurance.

    > Since I advocate a 'saftey net', poorer families can choose not to receive some treatments on insurance and use the socialised organisation instead. In more socialist France, many people take out private health insurance to cover health costs.


    I'm supporting a hybrid of healthcare systems mainly found throughout Continental Europe and all these countries offer universal healthcare.

    I think some of you are even overlooking minor factors such as doctor's pay in Britain, or even that our healthcare is already very privatised and money driven (money per patient etc...).

    I also do not mind healthcare being partially subsidised through tax subsidies (healthcare is deducted from tax payments up to a limit, and negative taxes can be possible). However I haven't properly thought negative taxes through, and some of the positives of libertarian healthcare might be lost.
    I understand the argument in terms of already private companies however the usage of this is more the speed at which treatment is available because yes the NHS has long waiting lists. But in no way can anyone say that the NHS itself, not the british healthcare system as a whole, is biased in terms of personal earnings. Im not talking politics, i'm talking about a system that disregards whether you are unemployed, on minimum wage or a high salary earner.

    I make £6.55 an hour. I can barely afford to cover my montly expenses at the moment. And im supposed to pay £10 maybe £20 maybe even more for "better" healthcare?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    The European model is that you pay a NI which covers the bulk of the cost and then you top it up with private medical insurance.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Europe

    So in Germany for example 77.5% of the cost is met by the taxpayer, the rest is covered by your medical insurance.

    In order to stop the 'but what about those who can't afford it' unemployed, long term sick, pregnant etc are covered automatically.

    What e have in the UK is a healthcare system that is 100% provided by the state. It's ever increasing and we therefore have three options.

    1) follow the European model.
    2) throw ever increasing amounts of money at it.
    3) outsource certain deliverables to make the money spent go farther.

    A grown up debate is needed on the NHS as a lot of the 'save our nhs' brigade I can't help feel should be renamed 'help me secured job' brigade.
    So basically if you're a high earner you pay extra? On top of the extra that you pay through your national insurance? Hardly seems fair. Hey you've worked hard to get where you are so give us more money.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rkjtallon1994)
    So basically if you're a high earner you pay extra? On top of the extra that you pay through your national insurance? Hardly seems fair. Hey you've worked hard to get where you are so give us more money.
    Define high earner? If you classify as a normaL worker on a normal salary as a high earner you're in for a shock. Guys on the production line at bmw for example are legally obliged to pay a small private healthcare premium.
    In fact it's rather fare. Smokers and lazy peol pay a bigger premium. For their life style choices.
    It's no different however taxes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    Define high earner? If you classify as a normaL worker on a normal salary as a high earner you're in for a shock. Guys on the production line at bmw for example are legally obliged to pay a small private healthcare premium.
    In fact it's rather fare. Smokers and lazy peol pay a bigger premium. For their life style choices.
    It's no different however taxes.
    I'm on minimum wage so I don't personally consider myself a high earner. I'm talking about people in proffesions who earn in the regions of 70k+
    The national insurance scheme works well because it works in terms of a percentage of your earnings. However from what I can tell that would still happen, but the privatisation would result in the need for high earners to spend extra through insurance companies?

    And what difference would privatisation make? Making the NHS private doesn't mean that more doctors will magically fall out of the sky.
    The issue often isn't the NHS but the people who use it. Waiting lines in hospitals are often so long because Timmy from down the road has a cough and rather than getting cough medicine he's in line infront of old Muriel who's having chest pains.

    Educate the users of the NHS. Don't put all the blame on a system when it is the people who are at fault.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rkjtallon1994)
    I'm on minimum wage so I don't personally consider myself a high earner. I'm talking about people in proffesions who earn in the regions of 70k+
    The national insurance scheme works well because it works in terms of a percentage of your earnings. However from what I can tell that would still happen, but the privatisation would result in the need for high earners to spend extra through insurance companies?

    And what difference would privatisation make? Making the NHS private doesn't mean that more doctors will magically fall out of the sky.
    The issue often isn't the NHS but the people who use it. Waiting lines in hospitals are often so long because Timmy from down the road has a cough and rather than getting cough medicine he's in line infront of old Muriel who's having chest pains.

    Educate the users of the NHS. Don't put all the blame on a system when it is the people who are at fault.
    The European system takes into account income. You only pay at certain income levels. And you're right about the NI system working well, that's why other EU nations have a similar system and works as a basis for their welfare and health services.
    The NHS has had a
    Lot of money thrown at it over th years and your right that educating people to use it properly is key. The problem is that it's difficult to educate people in using it properly. It's difficult to educate a entitlement generation how to use something they think is free. That's where private insurance comes in.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    The European system takes into account income. You only pay at certain income levels. And you're right about the NI system working well, that's why other EU nations have a similar system and works as a basis for their welfare and health services.
    The NHS has had a
    Lot of money thrown at it over th years and your right that educating people to use it properly is key. The problem is that it's difficult to educate people in using it properly. It's difficult to educate a entitlement generation how to use something they think is free. That's where private insurance comes in.
    Perhaps we should look to implementing this kind of education into schools?
    If I recall correctly, not ONCE did I have any kind of lesson about National Insurance or what it's for.

    Personally I have no issue with hospitals turning down people who clearly just need some night nurse.

    A major issue I find may be a contributing factor to long waiting room lines in hospitals is the lack of local surgery availability. I see my doctor at my local surgery every 3 months due to underlying health problems and I'm lucky enough to say I rarely have an issue getting an appointment on the same, depending on the time I ring.
    However I know of larger surgeries that often have appointments full for atleast a week.
    And they're often closed on weekends. This is also an issue that needs to be looked into in order to ease the flow of fools flooding into hospitals.

    Must say it's nice to debate with people of intelligence for a change.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rkjtallon1994)
    Because the NHS provides equal healthcare for all citizens.

    If we were to fall into privatization then the quality of health care we would receive would depend on our own personal earnings and what kind of insurance we can afford. We would be treating human beings like a car.
    Even visits to the GP are incredibly expensive but this would be covered by any kind of insurance, however, what if somebody had a brain tumour? What if a child had a brain tumour? The quality of their treatment, operations, therapy, rehabilitation etc would depend on what the individual could afford in terms of insurance and overall it would cost something in the range of tens maybe hundreds of thousands of pounds. What if your insurance doesn't cover this cost? Will you pay off your own back? Does a family have to put themselves into life long debt to save the life of their child?
    Equal in the sense it's bad for everyone perhaps. Healthcare already depends on income, those who can afford to go private will do so.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rkjtallon1994)
    Perhaps we should look to implementing this kind of education into schools?
    If I recall correctly, not ONCE did I have any kind of lesson about National Insurance or what it's for.

    Personally I have no issue with hospitals turning down people who clearly just need some night nurse.

    A major issue I find may be a contributing factor to long waiting room lines in hospitals is the lack of local surgery availability. I see my doctor at my local surgery every 3 months due to underlying health problems and I'm lucky enough to say I rarely have an issue getting an appointment on the same, depending on the time I ring.
    However I know of larger surgeries that often have appointments full for atleast a week.
    And they're often closed on weekends. This is also an issue that needs to be looked into in order to ease the flow of fools flooding into hospitals.

    Must say it's nice to debate with people of intelligence for a change.
    Where do you draw the line with what schools are educating people?

    Try implementing die thing that should be common sense and you end up with trade unionists looking out for NHS staff company ing about something or other.
 
 
 
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.